P
pianistclare
Guest
Thank you!
God bless.
- Status
God bless.
A
annem
Guest
I read Tabor’s “The Jesus Dynasty”, which proved to me Tabor knew nothing, nothing at all about the gospels and early Christianity. And he’s an archaeologist, so there was no excuse for his many howlers. At times I even found him downright deceptive. I was staggered anybody put any faith in the book.
His second book I haven’t read, but his co-author is the notorious Simcha Jacobovici, whose TV specials were viciously anti - Christian.
Yikes.
It would be like trusting the conclusions of Richard Dawkins.
God bless, Annem
His second book I haven’t read, but his co-author is the notorious Simcha Jacobovici, whose TV specials were viciously anti - Christian.
Yikes.
It would be like trusting the conclusions of Richard Dawkins.
God bless, Annem
F
Faith1960
Guest
Read it again. When he was talking about 88 people buried in the tomb, he wasnt talking about the “Jesus Tomb”, he was talking about another tomb he excavated.
Also, the first two links were interviews from before the discovery of the soil and chemicals found on the James ossuary. I’m only concerned with articles written after that discovery. April 2015, on.
F
Faith1960
Guest
What abot the second half of item# 42?
F
Faith1960
Guest
I might be wrong since another link you provided said there were 80 something people interred there. So im not sure. If im wong i apologize.
K
Kurisu35712
Guest
If your only critique of the sources I provided is that I made a mistake in one summary and that one point in another isn’t fleshed out to your liking, I don’t really know what else I can tell you. If you honestly think that single point validates every dishonest assumption and conclusion drawn in identifying this as the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth, I can’t really tell you anything else. I’m no Biblical scholar or Middle East archaeologist.
But neither is the man who made the documentary you’ve been referencing. I change my mind. Read the entire article by the University of the Holy Land. None of the initial premise holds any water. Nothing recently “discovered” validates any of it.
K
Kurisu35712
Guest
No problem. I think the number may have been an estimate.
The point was just that multiple people were often buried in the same ossuary, and that as a result, the Joseph mentioned on one may have been a distant cousin, great grandparent, or even ancestor of the Jesus mentioned as son of Joseph. Which isn’t even considering that “Jesus son of Joseph” was found on multiple ossuaries from the same area and time period, and that scholars heavily debate whether the ossuary in question even spells “Jesus” at all.
F
Faith1960
Guest
It isnt your mistake, its what the blog said, about "many scholarsconider the James son of Joseph, brotger of Jesus inscription to be authentic and identified with Jesus of Nazareth.
F
Faith1960
Guest
Also, the link about the James osuary, opposing arguments # 9 says theres a minority of reputable scholars who question the authenticity of the inscription specifically the brother of jesus part. Maybe im just confused.
Or maybe the blogger meant to say majority ather than minority?
F
Faith1960
Guest
Anyone else want to weigh in?
F
Faith1960
Guest
Anyone have any names of scholars who think the new news about the James ossuary is wrong?
Or names and email addresses that i could contact them about this?
I corresponded with a nearby priest who knows little about this topic.
Or names and email addresses that i could contact them about this?
I corresponded with a nearby priest who knows little about this topic.
Why do you need proof that they are wrong? Those making the assertion are the ones who are supposed to prove that they are right.Remember the Lost Tomb of Jesus hoopla? Well, now they’re at it again and I’m worried.
Simcha Jacobovici was vindicated in court, they said his documentary wasnt fraud.
Then I read these articles, saying that upon further testing of the James estuary, it greatly increases the likelihood that the Talpiot Tomb is that of Jesus.
Can anyone help me find proof online that they’re wrong – besides just telling me what our faith and Scripture teaches?
jamestabor.com/2015/04/04/breaking-news-the-controversial-james-ossuary-and-the-talpiot-tomb/
huffingtonpost.com/james-d-tabor/the-james-ossuary-and-the-talpiot-jesus-tomb_b_7006938.html
They said that if the James ossuary is from the Talpiot tomb, and they believe it is, that increases the odds of it being Jesus’s tomb by ALOT, being fairly certain it’s Jesus’s tomb.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Why are you getting your knickers in a twist?
If these so-called experts came out (and they probably will one day) and said that hey, guess what, we’ve got proof there was a tomb here, and we have proof it held Jesus’s body and guess what, we’ve got proof that the body was there a heck of a lot of time more than 3 days, because we have the names “Jesus son of Joseph”, “James brother of Jesus”, “Mary wife of Jesus”, so since all those names line up with “Jesus Christ”, this MUST be the tomb of Jesus, His body was there longer than your Christian scriptures say so, so He wasn’t really God, ha ha ha you’ve believed in a legend for 2000 years". . .
Would you bow your head in shame at being ‘gulled’ because a handful of not-very-reputable people with a vested interest in ‘taking down’ Christianity somehow managed to take some unrelated and unprovable ‘theories’ and weave them into a supposed ‘denial’ of Christianity?
Or would you bow your head in shame that your faith was so little that you would think, "oh Scripture and tradition are so ‘old’ and this claim is so new, therefore what people have said and written 2000 years AFTER THE FACT just MUST BE TRUE, and what was spoken of and written within living memory of the actual ACTIONS must be all wrong’. . .
P. T. Barnum I believe once said, “there’s a sucker born every minute”. . .and unfortunately in this ‘internet age’ all it seems to take is a ‘slick production’ and any, ANY kind of ‘new way of looking at something’ (because ‘new’ is always better, right? <cough, New Coke, cough>) and people will be willing to jettison their beliefs on ANYTHING (but especially religion) if you can make the counter claim sound snooty and ‘smart’ and ‘WE KNOW BEST’ enough. . .
F
Faith1960
Guest
Guess im a sucker then because this has me really upset.Why are you getting your knickers in a twist?
If these so-called experts came out (and they probably will one day) and said that hey, guess what, we’ve got proof there was a tomb here, and we have proof it held Jesus’s body and guess what, we’ve got proof that the body was there a heck of a lot of time more than 3 days, because we have the names “Jesus son of Joseph”, “James brother of Jesus”, “Mary wife of Jesus”, so since all those names line up with “Jesus Christ”, this MUST be the tomb of Jesus, His body was there longer than your Christian scriptures say so, so He wasn’t really God, ha ha ha you’ve believed in a legend for 2000 years". . .
Would you bow your head in shame at being ‘gulled’ because a handful of not-very-reputable people with a vested interest in ‘taking down’ Christianity somehow managed to take some unrelated and unprovable ‘theories’ and weave them into a supposed ‘denial’ of Christianity?
Or would you bow your head in shame that your faith was so little that you would think, "oh Scripture and tradition are so ‘old’ and this claim is so new, therefore what people have said and written 2000 years AFTER THE FACT just MUST BE TRUE, and what was spoken of and written within living memory of the actual ACTIONS must be all wrong’. . .
P. T. Barnum I believe once said, “there’s a sucker born every minute”. . .and unfortunately in this ‘internet age’ all it seems to take is a ‘slick production’ and any, ANY kind of ‘new way of looking at something’ (because ‘new’ is always better, right? <cough, New Coke, cough>) and people will be willing to jettison their beliefs on ANYTHING (but especially religion) if you can make the counter claim sound snooty and ‘smart’ and ‘WE KNOW BEST’ enough. . .
1
1ke
Guest
I don’t understand why, and so far you have not articulated WHY this makes one bit of difference one way or another.
K
Kurisu35712
Guest
Seriously, why do you believe they’re right about this? I provided multiple sources expressing various scholars’ doubts about their alleged “findings,” who are frankly leagues more reputable than a self-titled archaeologist and a journalist/documentary maker. You’re believing an unreputable archaeologist over the word of not only biblical scholars, but actual Jewish historians and archaeologists who disagree with the findings and their significance. I would understand better if this was the result of a huge scientific team who went in with no bias from the get-go, but this is a person who already went in with their conclusion in mind and based their findings on inaccurate assumptions and out of context quotes. Believing this story makes no logical sense.
F
Faith1960
Guest
Because my faith is so important to me and if this James ossuary IS from the Talpiot tomb, supposedly, according to most of what Ive been reading recently, means that all we’ve been taught is wrong and Jesus didnt ascend into heaven.
It all boils down to the soil and chemicals found on the ossuary.
F
Faith1960
Guest
In the link titled Was the James Ossuary Buried in the Talpiot Tomb…, im confused as to what #9 means… Did the writer make a mistake or am i misunderstanding him? It sounds like that point should be under the part that supports the idea the James ossuary came from the Talpiot tomb, not opposes it. Or am i misunderstanding?
K
Kurisu35712
Guest
This is, I assume, the point you’re referring to. For one, this point does not reference the James ossuary’s origin, only the authenticity of the inscription on it. #9, on its own, simply states that there are a number of reputable scholars who question the authenticity of the inscription on the James ossuary. Meaning there are reputable scholars who question even the validity of an ossuary that other scholars accept. Meaning there are doubts even as to the authenticity of the widely accepted ossuary.
If reputable experts question the validity of the reasonably unrelated other ossuary, that speaks volumes when nearly all scholars and archaeologists disagree with this person’s conclusions regarding the tomb. There are experts who do not believe the James ossuary to be authentic. As a result, that should logically indicate that when nearly all scholars believe the Talpiot tomb to be inauthentic, they’re probably correct.
Worth noting as well is that number 6 indicates that it is unlikely that the James ossuary originated in the Talpiot tomb. If it did, why did initial excavations record only 10 ossuaries, when the James ossuary would have been an 11th? Furthermore, why would someone who previously found the tomb have only removed the James ossuary and not the supposedly significant others?
Also worth noting, as referenced in the UHL article… The paleontologist who reported the chemical composition in the soil as a “match” was misquoted and misrepresented. The man himself provided further comment. When he said “match,” he meant “consistent with the other data.” Not an irrefutable match. These analysts did not test the soil composition of every single tomb and grave around Jerusalem. Finding a similar or consistent soil composition does not mean that there is only one tomb that can provide these results. Basing a conclusion on that severely limited data is not only bad reporting, it’s plain bad science and bad forensics.
- Status